Re: [Libreoffice] patch for make to help in gbuild debugging

Hi Lubos, Hi Thorsten,
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:59:51 +0200
Lubos Lunak <l.lunak@suse.cz> wrote:

> If the extensions are pushed upstream, the copy is synced to
> upstream, and the extensions are not relied upon, I don't see why
> there should be a big problem as long as people find it worth it.

I see Thorstens point though that this is a slippery slope. From the
temptation to have our own make in the tree it is a very short way to
become incompatible with the upstream version. 'We' (old project
grognards) would not notice the difference, but for new contributors it
would be yet another wtf on the way to their first build. I wrote about
the strict conditions I consider essential for a make fork above.
However historically, we have not been exactly been too successful in
this project resisting temptations for strategic reasons if something
came along which seemed sexy tactically.
So soon we would end up with a build system only building with our fork
and nobody would even notice (because all of us use it anyway) and when
somebody comes up with "you broke the vanilla make build" he would get
told to use the forked make -- instead of doing the right thing and
fixing it -- thereby killing the feature in a drive-by.

Best,

Bjoern

-- 
https://launchpad.net/~bjoern-michaelsen